BANGKOK, Thailand – Delegates at a major climate meeting debated Monday how to rein in rising greenhouse gas emissions that could threaten hundreds of millions with hunger and disease in the coming decades.

For the rest of the week, hundreds of scientists and diplomats attending the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change meeting will work to finalize a report detailing a range of technological options to mitigate rising levels of carbon dioxide, methane and other heat-trapping gases.

"The time to act is now," Chartree Chueyprasit, a deputy secretary in Thailand's Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, told delegates.

How did those "hundreds of scentists and diplomats" get to Thailand? Did they fly? Did they go commercial or take a private plane? Are they getting around in limo's, or are they walking? Why should we listen to people who continuously fail to be carbon neutral, and live the life they want everyone else to live? It's always about other people changing their lifestyle, never themselves.

Even a 2-degree-Celsius (3.6-degree-Fahrenheit) rise could subject up to 2 billion people to water shortages by 2050 and threaten extinction for 20 percent to 30 percent of the world's species, the IPCC said.

"Could." Sure didn't happen back during the Global Climate optiumum, did it? Glad they are here to tell us what specifically will happen.

However, despite coming out from a hypocritical meeting, and being for the wrong reasons, they do have some good ideas

Making buildings more energy-efficient, especially in the developing world, through better insulation, lighting and other steps, also could lead to significant cuts as would converting from coal to natural gas, nuclear power and renewable energy such as wind.

Less significant but also important would be steps to make motor vehicles more fuel-efficient, reduce deforestation, and plant more trees as a carbon "sink," absorbing carbon dioxide. Even capturing methane emitted by livestock and its manure would help, the draft report says.

Good ideas are good ideas, no matter what silliness they are based on. We should become more energy efficient. Go to more nuclear and renewable (though do not tell Ted Kennedy, who is still blocking the Cape Wind Project.) More fuel efficient vehicles, reduce deforestation and clear cutting. Be responsible, recycle, do not litter. Stop over-fishing. Even switching to CFL lightbulbs. The little things can help, which gets lost in the mix of hypocrites talking about global warming as caused by Man.

Speaking of hypocrites

(TORONTO) — Al Gore condemned Canada's new plan to reduce greenhouse gases, saying it was "a complete and total fraud" because it lacks specifics and gives industry a way to actually increase emissions.

Under the initiative announced Thursday, Canada aims to reduce the current level of greenhouse gas emissions 20 percent by 2020. But the government acknowledged it would not meet its obligations under the Kyoto Protocol, which requires 35 industrialized countries to cut greenhouse-gas emissions by 5 percent below 1990 levels by 2012.

(Environmental News Service) Environment Minister John Baird shot back with a statement later Saturday, saying, ""It is difficult to accept criticism from someone who preaches about climate change, but who never submitted the Kyoto Protocol to a vote in the United States Senate, who never did as much as Canada is now doing to fight climate change during eight years in Office, and who has campaigned exclusively for hundreds of Democratic candidates who have weaker plans to fight greenhouse gases than Canada’s New Government."

"It is equally regrettable that the former U.S. vice president decided to speak out without ever having been briefed on the contents of our plan," said Baird.

Well, one point is that the Senate voted 95-0 to reject Kyoto, and none of the signatury countries seems to be close to meeting. But, what did Gore do during his 8 years as VP, and all those years as a Senator? What is he doing now, other then jet setting around the world, attending all sorts of high fallutin' affairs, having high energy bills, and telling others how they should live their lives.

Do you have an interesting post? Well, go ahead and leave a trackback, with a reciprical link back to me. Others offering open trackbacks are over in the right sidebar, near bottom.

5 Responses to “Global Warming Today: Meetings In Thailand And The Goracle”

Teach said: How did those “hundreds of scentists and diplomats” get to Thailand?

I don’t know. Do you?

Teach said: Sure didn’t happened back during the Global Climate optimum, did it?

Teach, are you referring to the Medieval Warm Period? If you look at the reconstructed temperature chart you can see the temperature anomaly the IPCC is concerned about is larger (and more rapid) than what happened during the Medieval Warm Period.

Any energy plan should begin with conservation – as you rightly indicate – ,since the cheapest, safest energy is that which isn’t used.

My biggest concern when electric energy policy is discussed is that few understand how electricity is actually made right now. If we don’t understand our energy present, how can we hope to pick the best energy future? I happen to work in the U.S. nuclear industry, but I’m not sold on any particular kind of energy for the future. (Really. They all have problems.)

To help with the public energy discussion, I’ve written a novel looking at nuclear power in the U.S. – its people, its politics, its technology. Rad Decision is available at no cost online at http://RadDecision.blogspot.com – and readers seem to like it judging from their comments on the homepage. It is also now in paperback at online retailers. Both proponents and critics will find a lot to muse over in Rad Decision – because the real world of nuclear power is far different than what most imagine it to be (both good and bad).

Silke, there are three ways for most to get there: fly, drive, or take a boat. Which do you think most of these high falutin’ folks did?

Can you tell me with 100% certainty that that is what is going to happen, Silke? Look back: in the last 150 years, the media reported on several bad warming trends and cold trends that were going to lead to a disasterous climate. A new ice age! A massive hot era!

The climate changes, and, until you have proof that this is different from any other change, and, yup, start living the life, why should we listen?

James, I am looking forward to reading that. Nuclear is not perfect, nor the ultimate answer. I would like to see something else be developed, particularly using solar, for the long term.

I understand your point about not practicing what they preach, but I don’t think those who believe in AGW are asking people to stop driving their cars today. So unless every one of those scientists took a private jet to the conference (which I agree is a bad practice) I think we should listen to what they have to say. Who knows, maybe they all walked. 🙂

Teach said: Can you tell me with 100% certainty that that is what is going to happen, Silke?

LIVE TRAFFIC

YE OLDE ADVERTS

Categories

Calendar

Meta

SWAG

THE CODE

All posts here are my views. None represent my employer. If ye can prove me wrong, so be it. Ye can rant and rave at me, but be mostly polite to any other commentors. I will put up with quite a bit, but be mostly respectful to others.

NOTICE In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this web site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed further, except for "fair use" non-profit educational purposes, without permission of the copyright owner.